Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4' <br />S <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />l0 <br />11 <br />la <br />13 <br />1a <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />~iaally, the Debtors believe that Section <br />S07(a)(7)(E) does not entitle the Department of Labor to <br />priority, because reader that section thazs gust ez~.st as <br />excise tax oa a transaction ocenrriag within the three years <br />immediately preceding the date of the tiling of the petition. <br />J1s vas noted is the asmoraadnm filed by the Debtors, +the <br />Departexnt of Labor's zeimbnrsement claim is first ao•t a part <br />of the excise tax subparts of the Internal Itsveane Ca3e. The <br />coal excise tax to which I earlier refernd is iac].nded in <br />that excise tax portion, but the reimbursement cla~xt.is not. <br />Second, the Department of Lboz's claim l:or <br />reimbursement is not based oa the transaction. <br />Third, the Department of Labors reimbursement <br />claim is not one which arose during the three Tears <br />!s®ediately preceding the petition date. Mather, l:he <br />Department of Labor became contingently liable for claims <br />that were asserted or will be asserted by fors~er coal liners, <br />surviving dependents and potential surviving depeallaats at <br />the time those coal siaazs e-ere exposed to the ~az~.ous <br />conditions is the sine that oansed them to oaatrael: black <br />long disease. <br />Since, as I aratioasd, CliI sensed its opal siaiag <br />operations is 1962, the traasaetions ehich qaw sine 'Go these <br />claims, bad, by virtue of the closing of the sine is :1982, <br />had to have arisen sore than three Tsars prior to l:be date of <br />7 <br /> <br />